Anyone using 9.3X62 maximum plus loads?

[Why not?]

As most of you know, I have been loading and hunting with the 9.3 x 62 for more than 40 years, and posted quite a bit about the cartridge. My load has always been around 2300 fps with 286 gr bullets. Have lost count of how many animals have been put in the freezer with that load. Literally tons of meat.

Most have been taken using plain vanilla cup and core bullets, everything we have up here from grouse to grizzlies. Almost all were taken with a single shot.

Today I took another look at the loads published in the Nosler Reloading manual, and they all seem to be around the same velocity using their partition of the same weight.




I see loads published in several threads by guys using loads close to 200 ft./s faster with this and other bullets. Any of you using loads that powerful?

Ted

 

[saskgunowner101]

RL-17 is supposed to be magical for the 9.3x62 velocity wise. In the past I used Varget (don't recall at the moment exact grains , 58.5-59.5? grains) with a 286 grain Privi bullet for an easy 2,450 fps. I'm sure there was more to be had, but that's where I stopped. The important thing to remember in a modern rifle, is bolt thrust on a specific size bolt face is what matters, IMHO. If you can wind out a 270 Win to 60,000 psi (270, 30/06, 9.3 etc same case basically) why not the others? That's where my head is at.

Edit to add

The charge was 58.5 grains Varget, but also a 24" barrel.

 

[Gatehouse]

Do you think this is one of those situations where the 9.3x62 is such an old cartridge that in modern firearms it can tolerate much higher pressures than the old guns and old brass?

Brass is always going to be the first part that fails and in a modern rifle you can certainly work up until you see pressure signs in brass (or the chroonograph) and back off.

Also with newer powders is the data for such an old cartridge even keeping up? Maybe there is a new miracle powder for that chambering, but I doubt any companies are doing much pressure testing for it.

 

[Hitzy]

I wouldn't go crazy with Partitions due to the different construction, most manuals have them running a little lower due to this, kind of like the solid coppers.
I've hit 2500fps with PRVI 286gr, it's miserable to shoot lol, not gonna soft ball it, 60gr Varget, I dropped down to 55gr Varget, still awesome and not as miserable.

 

[Why not?]

That’s why I asked. No wonder it’s brutal! An eight pound rifle generating just under 4000 foot pounds of energy is not kidding.

It’s getting your attention!

Ted

 

[saskgunowner101]

I wouldn't go crazy with Partitions due to the different construction, most manuals have them running a little lower due to this, kind of like the solid coppers.
I've hit 2500fps with PRVI 286gr, it's miserable to shoot lol, not gonna soft ball it, 60gr Varget, I dropped down to 55gr Varget, still awesome and not as miserable.

It does get a little punchy/angry when you start winding it out that's for sure.

 

[Why not?]

If a barreled action can handle 60,000 psi loads in a 270 Winchester rifle, it can also handle the same pressure in a 9.3X62 rifle.

Whether the rifleman can handle the substantially increased recoil is another thing.

As well, the increased recoil will be leaning much harder on the stock.

Ted

 

[Hitzy]

That’s why I asked. No wonder it’s brutal! An eight pound rifle generating just under 4000 foot pounds of energy is not kidding.

It’s getting your attention!

Ted

Mine doesn't really have a recoil pad either lol.
I feel like I should be wearing a mouth guard when I shoot it, kinda rattles the teeth lol
Can't argue with how it shoots, my friends don't like it much, 1 round is enough.

 

[Why not?]

Here’s my latest sight-in check at 100 yards, yesterday afternoon.

PRVI 286 gr ahead of 58 gr of CF 8506 and CCI 200 primers . Adjusted scope up three inches and right three quarters of an inch.

Ready for anything we have here with dead-on hold to 200 yards.

Ted

 

[9.3mauser]

Most of my loads are running around 2450 with a 285 gr bullet. This is flirting with the original ballistics for the .375 H&H. Whether the extra 100 fps is really making a difference is debatable, but it makes the holdovers easy to remember. I zero at 175, 3" of drop at 200, 6" at 250, and a foot low at 300.

Factory loads of the same weight seem to run 2280-2300. I've never had one live up to the 2350 claim.

It's not a lot of fun to shoot over the bench, but field positions are no worse than a heavily loaded shotgun.

As already mentioned, if a given rifle can handle .270 pressures then there's no reason ( beyond shooter comfort) not to load the 9.3 to the same pressure.

The loads listed in the Nosler manual tend to run about 60 fps slower in my rifle, probably because of throat length.

 

[freire]

I run mine with 59.5 grains of varget and 285 grains Prvi, very accurate load but also pretty stout recoil.

 

[Weatherby Fan]

Yes I’m running 250gr Accubonds at 2720 fps, before you all scream over pressure I’m using the max charge of N540 from Vhitavuori’s website
This is out of a 24” Shaw barrel
So far it’s been very accurate,

 

[MDR]

I have partitions moving at 2300fps and had a 250gn accubond load that chrono'd at 2700. I've backed that load down to 2600 and am happy with it.
John Barsness published the load I used for the accubond.

 

[jaycee]

I’ve been using John Barsness’ loads for about 6 years now. He had his loads pressure tested in a lab and they were just below 60K psi iirc. If you google his load data (Mule Deer on 24hourcampfire) there is a neat little load table that can be found. The two I’ve settled on for m 24” CZ550 are:

1. 286 Nos Part’n/66.0 gr Big Game/CCI200/ Nosler cases/OAL 3.45” at a chronographed average of 2550 fps.

2. 250 gr Nos Accubond/62.0 gr Varget/CCI200/ Nosler cases/OAL 3.45” at a chronographed average of 2660 fps

Recoil is there, but it’s certainly manageable. I’d say it’s similar to a 300 mag, but not as snappy - more of a big push.

 

[jaycee]

I found JB’s 9.3x62 load data:

With lot to lot variation I had to go to 62.0 grains of Varget to achieve his pressure tested 2650 fps velocity (2660 fps on my chronograph)

 

[AB3006]

I have 286 gr PPUs and Varget as per Lyman 51Ed. From JB's data above, it seems that Varget is preferable for the 250 grainers, but Big Game is better for the 286. Should I be worried here?

 

[jaycee]

I have 286 gr PPUs and Varget as per Lyman 51Ed. From JB's data above, it seems that Varget is preferable for the 250 grainers, but Big Game is better for the 286. Should I be worried here?

If it’s in a published book and you chronographed at or near the book velocity, I wouldn’t be worried that you are over pressure. I don’t have that particular manual, but I imagine that it is tested at “traditional” 9.3x62 pressures, not the newer 30-06 pressures.

One reason I read that JB prefers Big Game (spherical) over Varget (stick) for heavier bullets is that spherical powder packs much more densely in cases compared to stick powder, and with heavier (longer) bullets he was running out of case capacity with stick powders before he reached desired pressure. Another big plug for Big Game is that it is very temperature stable.

 

[AB3006]

If it’s in a published book and you chronographed at or near the book velocity, I wouldn’t be worried that you are over pressure. I don’t have that particular manual , but I imagine that it will s tested at “traditional” 9.3x62 pressures, not the newer 30-06 pressures.

One reason I read that JB prefers Big Game (spherical) over Varget (stick) for heavier bullets is that spherical powder packs much more densely in cases compared to stick powder, and he was running out of case capacity with stick powders before he reached desired pressure. Another big plug for Big Game is that it has a very temperature stable.

Thank you. I run Hunter in my other loads (30-06, 6.5x55, and 243), so I'm somewhat familiar with ball powders. Didn't realise that was the main reason. Will have to run out for a pound of BG when the time comes to give it a whirl.